Garcia-Fuentes v. Superior Court CA6

Filed 4/13/23 Garcia-Fuentes v. Superior Court CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

WILLIAM GARCIA-FUENTES, H050346 (Monterey County Petitioner, Super. Ct. No. 21CR009067) v. SUPERIOR COURT OF MONTEREY COUNTY, Respondent; THE PEOPLE, Real Party in Interest.

DAVID IRETA REYES, H050366 (Monterey County Petitioner, Super. Ct. No. 21CR009066) v. SUPERIOR COURT OF MONTEREY COUNTY, Respondent; THE PEOPLE, Real Party in Interest.

Following a double murder in 2021, petitioners William Garcia-Fuentes and David Ireta Reyes were held to answer on 10 felony charges, with gang and weapons enhancements. After the trial court denied petitioners’ motions to dismiss pursuant to Penal Code1 section 995, petitioners filed petitions for writ of prohibition in this court. Petitioners

1 Unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code.

assert the prosecution failed to prove the necessary elements of a criminal street gang, because they failed to establish “a pattern of criminal activity” under section 186.22 as modified by Assembly Bill No. 333 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.). Petitioners ask us to order the trial court to vacate its ruling on the motions and enter a new order setting aside the gang charges and gang enhancements. We issued an order to show cause why the relief petitioners seek should not be granted. The People filed returns conceding that petitioners are entitled to relief. We accept the concession and will issue writs of prohibition restraining respondent court from taking any further action against petitioners based upon the gang charges and gang enhancements in the information and directing respondent court to vacate its order denying petitioners’ section 995 motions to set aside the information and enter a new order granting the motion, in part, with respect to the gang charges and gang enhancements. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. Procedural History On February 24, 2022, a third amended complaint was filed charging petitioners with two counts of murder (§ 187; counts 1 & 2), with the following enhancements: principal’s use of a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)), discharge of firearm in a gang case (§ 12022.53, subd. (c)), use of a firearm (§ 12022.53, subds. (d), (e)(1)), street terrorism (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(5)), and the following special circumstances: gang murder (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(22)), and multiple murder (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(3)); count 1 also included an enhancement for murder to prevent testimony (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(10)); one count of criminal street gang conspiracy (§ 182.5; count 3), enhanced by principal’s use of a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)), discharge of firearm in a gang case (§ 12022.53, subd. (c)), use of a firearm (§ 12022.53, subds. (d), (e)(1)), one count of shooting at an occupied motor vehicle (§ 246; count 4), enhanced by principal’s use of a firearm (§ 12022.53, subds. (d), (e)(1)) and street terrorism (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1), (4)); four